The Gun debate sandbox

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 5201 - 5220 of total 5826 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Jul 8, 2014 - 10:54am PT
If caught, and successfully prosecuted, five years in The Joint.

What you describe is already illegal.
the Fet

climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
Jul 8, 2014 - 11:05am PT
Madbolter1:

How did that line of logic work out for prohibition? How did that line of logic work out for the endless war on drugs?

Why are you equating background laws (regulations) to banning? Alcohol and drugs should be legal and regulated. Just like guns.

The war on drugs would have made a lot more sense if we called it the war on drub abuse. The "war on guns" would make sense if we called it "the war on gun violence".

ALL that means is that the something will become more expensive but will still be ENTIRELY accessible to ANYBODY that wants the something.

No it also means there will be LESS guns. It's simple supply and demand economics. If something is more expensive there will be less demand.

If they are harder to get (much harder for people who shouldn't have them) there is less of a chance of them being in the wrong hands at the wrong time. Again simple logic you should be able to admit.

What you have not even begun to demonstrate is that fewer criminals will get fewer of them.

I laid it out logically. If you can't/won't follow this line of logic you are not thinking impartially.

Do you believe we should eliminate all background checks and allow anyone to buy a gun, the only deterrent being that it's illegal if the person shouldn't own one? (don't criminals by definition break the law?) If you believe background checks work at all you see the reason for them. They should be universal.

In California all guns sales must go through a FFL dealer and the purchasers must pass a background check. If this was applied nationwide there would be thousands of guns kept out of the wrong hands. Again if you can't admit that you are being illogical to support what you want to believe.

And unless you can indicate why somebody should believe that the government is even CAPABLE of virtually shutting down the flow of guns into criminal and nut-job hands, the need of self-defense against gun-toting bad guys remains real and alive.

We can't "virtually shut down" the flow of guns into the wrong hands, but we should reduce it as much a possible without any significant hardships for legal owners. Just to pull a number completely out of the air, what if we reduced the number of new guns getting to criminals by 50%. Wouldn't that be worth the extra effort of background checks? How many lives would be saved, 1, 10, 100, 1000? Isn't that worth the effort?

Nobody is saying "more guns" in general terms. What people like me are saying is: More guns in the hands of law-abiding and well-trained citizens, with a public presence of same.

The effect of not having more background checks is "more guns" in general terms. That's my point. I know gun supporters mean more guns in the hands of the right people. But how do try to make sure most guns end up in the hands of law-abiding and well-trained people without regulations?

I'd be interested to see if more guns makes places more of less safe. I'm sure it's very dependent on the particular location, in some places in may actually work. But it seems like that idea would lead back to the wild west where everyone carried. In certain situations like dangerous inner cities it may actually work (mutually assured destruction like a nuclear war), but in low crime areas I wouldn't be surprised if having more guns around leads to more crimes of passion and road rage type incidents, which would offset any reductions from career type criminals. Like the guy in the movie theater who shot a guy for talking during the previews. Personally I feel safe with less guns around unless they are in the hands of law enforcement (and I don't even fully trust them).

But having a gun does provide a measured response to a certain sort of risk, and it's a relatively easy way to address that risk. Why wouldn't I do so?

Because it's a pain in the ass to carry a heavy, dangerous tool around all the time. It's much easier and more effective to stay out of the wrong areas and use situational awareness to stay safe. I have traveled to 46 states and many countries including Mexico. There have been maybe 2 or 3 times I would have felt safer with a gun after taking a wrong turn and ending up in a dangerous neighborhood. Would it have been worth it to carry a gun around my whole life for those few minutes of slightly better peace of mind. Hell no IMO. That's like carrying around a #6 camalot on every climb I've ever done in the rare case I need it. I try to reduce the amount of crap I need to lug around, not increase it.

(Edit to add: I don't want to take away your right to carry, IF you have passed background checks and safety classes. I just don't want to have to deal with bringing a gun everywhere. I'm just getting used to have to bring reading glasses everywhere because my eyes are getting old. Just THAT is a pain, nevermind a gun.)

If you need a gun how do you feel safe in other countries where you can't bring them? I can't take a gun to Mexico (without a big legal risk) and I have never felt unsafe in Mexico because I stay out of the wrong areas and don't act stupid.
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Relic MilkEye and grandpoobah of HBRKRNH
Jul 8, 2014 - 11:16am PT
The firearms sales form is a FEDERAL form 4473. It IS UNIVERSAL to every state. Each state has its own checking office which is ALSO tied to FEDERAL data bases.. So i am curious as to these "universal background check" statements.
Jim Brennan

Trad climber
Canada
Jul 8, 2014 - 11:18am PT
This guy is worth watching and listening to.

Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Relic MilkEye and grandpoobah of HBRKRNH
Jul 8, 2014 - 11:37am PT
I Agree with that large gentleman JB. And he is quite correct that few people notice open carrying when its a small handgun on the waist. Ive seen very few people notice mine, and i go everywhere with one.

Ive never wanted to carry an AR or any other rifle in public, although,, in the 60s, my brother and i walked from Vista area - down B street in Sparks Nev carrying our shotguns as we had been hunting all day. Pheasant tails hanging out of our hunting vests and all.. A Sparks PD unit finally pulled up next to us to ask about the guns, then laughed when they found out. They then questioned us on our "spots" for pheasant hunting, and of course we didnt exactly divulge our secret spot.
frank wyman

Mountain climber
montana
Jul 8, 2014 - 11:44am PT
I've sold quite a few guns in my lifetime, but only to people I personally knew. I never put a add in the newspaper as I did not want anyone comming over to my house or meeting them in some parking lot. If I need to sell some unwanted gun I just go to a FFL dealer in town(gun store) and put it on consignment and they will do all the paperwork and background checks and charge me a small fee,That way I can also get rid of the ammo that goes with it as gun stores do not buy secondhand ammo.Works for me...But it is a whole different story at gun shows here in Montana, No checks on private sales just pony up the $$$ and out the door you go...That system could use some changes..
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Jul 8, 2014 - 12:02pm PT
I Agree with that large gentleman JB. And he is quite correct that few people notice open carrying when its a small handgun on the waist. Ive seen very few people notice mine, and i go everywhere with one.

Seriously? That's so sad...

DMT
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Relic MilkEye and grandpoobah of HBRKRNH
Jul 8, 2014 - 12:04pm PT
Doesnt make me sad in the least. And further,, im not sad that it makes you sad eh..


and Frank,, that of course is PRIVATE sales at gun shows- every one there with a booth has an FFL and does indeed do background checks.
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Jul 8, 2014 - 12:12pm PT
I'm happy it makes me sad.

DMT
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Relic MilkEye and grandpoobah of HBRKRNH
Jul 8, 2014 - 12:17pm PT
And yet,, i dont care...
moosedrool

climber
lost, far away from Poland
Jul 8, 2014 - 12:19pm PT
Happy for DMT, sad for Ron, which makes me Moosemix, but otherwise Mooseclam.
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Relic MilkEye and grandpoobah of HBRKRNH
Jul 8, 2014 - 12:21pm PT
Had it NOT BEEN for a gun, i wouldnt be here today,, now THAT would have made me sad. Some of you that would have made happy, but again,, i do not care.
crankster

Trad climber
Jul 8, 2014 - 12:26pm PT
I hope Ron gets mental health therapy before he pulls a Zimmerman. Or he's put under house arrest. The world will be a better, safer place.
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Jul 8, 2014 - 12:28pm PT
3 posts into your "Do Not Care" route is troubling, Ron. I think you DO care. That makes me happy too.

P1 of Do Not Care (5.5 G, P1 is sorta confusing but becomes straight forward the higher you get ;D )
And further,, im not sad that it makes you sad eh..


P2 of Do Not Care
And yet,, i dont care...

P3 of Do No Care
but again,, i do not care.

DMT
Gary

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
Jul 8, 2014 - 02:31pm PT
...but rather a reactionary thing AFTER they commit more crime and finally get caught.

Ron is on to something. We need to be proactive and arrest people BEFORE they commit crime.
Gary

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
Jul 8, 2014 - 02:34pm PT
This guy is worth watching and listening to.

"I'm not looking to scare folks."

Bullsh#t.
StahlBro

Trad climber
San Diego, CA
Jul 8, 2014 - 02:50pm PT
What is really scary is a bunch of heavily armed, paranoid people.
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Relic MilkEye and grandpoobah of HBRKRNH
Jul 8, 2014 - 03:14pm PT
News flash Gary,, entering ILLEGALLY into this country IS a "crime" punishable by law. Hence the reference "Illegals/gang members...
johnboy

Trad climber
Can't get here from there
Jul 8, 2014 - 03:20pm PT
Moose,, there are directives and policies pushed by the FED govt that prevent MANY illegals from being removed. The VERY same policies that now fly plane loads of recently rounded up illegals from the border to various American towns and cities. Why are those illegals not being flown back into Central or South American countries from whence they came?

These policies protect illegals from local law enforcement to a great degree. When our sheriff put an article in our local news about how many KNOWN gang members now resided in our town, he couldnt even identify them to the public as they are given the SAME rights at legal US citizens in many regards.
Maybe you should ask why several states now issue

So many stupid statements in only two small paragraphs.
Why don't you educate yourself as to what laws apply to illegal immigrants and why law dictates who stays and who goes back immediately. Also educate yourself to the legal differences between adjacent countries and non-adjacent ones. There's also a difference between children and adults aliens.

Do your own homework for a change.
crankster

Trad climber
Jul 8, 2014 - 03:40pm PT
^^^
You can't expect someone to educate themselves when they display his kind of ignorance. Regularly.
Messages 5201 - 5220 of total 5826 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews